Siesmic Evidence Proves Inside Job?

FACT: "There is no scientific basis for the conclusion that explosions brought down the towers," Lerner-Lam tells PM. "That representation of our work is categorically incorrect and not in context."

The report issued by Lamont-Doherty includes various graphs showing the seismic readings produced by the planes crashing into the two towers as well as the later collapse of both buildings. WhatReallyHappened.com chooses to display only one graph (Graph 1), which shows the readings over a 30-minute time span.

On that graph, the 8- and 10-second collapses appear--misleadingly--as a pair of sudden spikes. Lamont-Doherty's 40-second plot of the same data (Graph 2) gives a much more detailed picture: The seismic waves--blue for the South Tower, red for the North Tower--start small and then escalate as the buildings rumble to the ground. Translation: no bombs.
Click to expand...
graph 1
graph 2
source
 
In all fairness, TS has been saying the explosions went off before the impacts, not the collapses. The graphs and corresponding article talk about the collapses.
 
Last edited:
The graphs are lovely. Though labeled "impact one" and so forth, they still have the 14 adn 17 second discrpancies witht the radar data.
 
Arkan_Wolfshade said:
graph 1
graph 2
source
Click to expand...
Excellent graphs. Thanks for finding these.

You may note, however, that TruthSeeker1234 merely asked for comments about Ross and Furlong's paper. As it turns out their conclusions are bogus even if you accept their assumptions.

The graphs, in contrast, show quite conclusively just how minor the aircraft impacts were compared to background noise, which translates into potential additional inaccuracy. No surprise.
 
dissonance said:
That's exactly my question - why have explosives in the basement that you set off before the planes hit? What's the point?
Click to expand...
I don't know. I'm waiting for some one (Truthseeker?) to come up with an answer to it. As far as I'm concerned, the experts say the seismograph records show the planes hitting the towers and that's the end of it.
 
realitybites said:
Truthie.... Here's a link to the contact information for everyone at the Lamont-Doherty Observatory.

Give 'em a call and see what they make of that paper you linked to.
Click to expand...

He will never do this. he won't even respond to your post. I gave him the names, phone numbers and email addresses of the men who sorted through all of the ground zero rubble to show it wasn't "puverized" and that much non-steel matter survived. He utterly ignored me.

The fun for him is fitting pictures and YouTube video together like it's a giant internet mystery. Actually getting first-hand information would ruin the game.

Also, as most Ctists have some sort of borderline personality disorder, he probably cannot personally interact with people whom he suspects will reject him. The internet provides a buffer that a phone would not.
 
Mackey asserted
As it turns out [Ross/Furlong's] conclusions are bogus even if you accept their assumptions.
Click to expand...

Really? This is new. What assumptions do you mean? Do you mean, assuming that the radar data are accurate to within one second? Or what?
 
I am coming into this thread quite late in the game but from what I can sum up into a few sentences:

- It is quite improbable that these "explosion" times are 100% accurate relative to the impact times in what happened first (if the seismic activity was not just the plane impact itself)
- Also.. Not only do I agree with the "not a seismic expert" theory explained earlier in this thread, but even if he was, he is not an architect. I would like to know the opinion on an architect in this matter on whether or not the seismic activity could be caused by the planes themselves! The same way energy can travel through anything, is it so hard to believe the energy and friction/force created from the crash also created the seismic activity in the basement (which is the foundation of this very building)??! Not to sound incredibly unrelated.. but if you punch someone square in the face, they can feel it in their toes. Why not the same theory applied to a building being crashed into by a plane?

I know I am quite new here and this post may not be welcomed.. but IMO anyone thinking, based on this evidence, that 9/11 was an inside job needs to rethink what exactly they are trying to prove and why.
 
TruthSeeker1234 said:
Mackey asserted

Really? This is new. What assumptions do you mean? Do you mean, assuming that the radar data are accurate to within one second? Or what?
Click to expand...
What I mean is -- again -- if you accept that the seismic data shows what they say it does, they're still wrong, because they haven't properly estimated their error. What I mean is that you don't need to challenge their sources or their interpretation of same, even though you can, as shown by Arkan. Their paper is just plain wrong, all by itself.
 
Why trigger an explosion in the base seconds before the plane impact then wait several minutes before exploding the other charges to bring the building down? Why not blow it all at the same instant? If the government was crafty enough to place tons of explosive in key structural areas without anybody noticing and using hundreds of remote control detonating devices which would replace the miles of detcord usually used to set off a CD implosion ( I think people would notice miles of detcord running all over the place) They certainly could have detnoted everything the instant the plane impacted the building.
Also what purpose could detnating a bomb in the basement serve? According to the CT'ers the Government was also responsible for the first attempt. An attempt which failed because there was too little explosive to do the job. (this dispite the government having explosive engineers at thier service who would have known how much it would have taken) If the first explosion did not weaken the base (an explosion which everybody heard and caused much smoke and fire) then why would an explosion which was not heard or caused smoke and fire be thought to weaken the base any more than the first? Besides the building collapsed from the top down not from the base.

Also is there any evidence of people hearing or seeing an explosion 14 seconds before the plane crashed into the first tower? If I recall correctly everything was quiet up untill the first plane crashed.
And before you say quiet or silent explosive. what kind of explosive would be silent and still cause a siesmic event?
 
uruk said:
Also is there any evidence of people hearing or seeing an explosion 14 seconds before the plane crashed into the first tower? If I recall correctly everything was quiet up untill the first plane crashed.
And before you say quiet or silent explosive. what kind of explosive would be silent and still cause a siesmic event?
Click to expand...

Waiting for BS101 to bring the WTC jannitor into his argument... who appearantly heard the silence explosion...
 
R.Mackey said:
What I mean is -- again -- if you accept that the seismic data shows what they say it does, they're still wrong, because they haven't properly estimated their error. What I mean is that you don't need to challenge their sources or their interpretation of same, even though you can, as shown by Arkan. Their paper is just plain wrong, all by itself.
Click to expand...

Does any of this malarke take into account the fact that the surface waves--or whatever--have to travel from the WTC to the siesmograph--a finite, measurable distance, which takes said waves a finite, measurable time to traverse?
 
rwguinn said:
Does any of this malarke take into account the fact that the surface waves--or whatever--have to travel from the WTC to the siesmograph--a finite, measurable distance, which takes said waves a finite, measurable time to traverse?
Click to expand...

Well, the complaint is that the seismograph triggered before the "official" time of impact, so that's not really at issue. It's more a question of sloppy researchers assuming all clocks are dead-on and synchronized all the time, without bothering to check this.
 
The "fireball down the elevator shaft" is far-fetched at best. Most of the elevators did not go all the way up to the impact area, thus would not be a conduit for this alleged fireball. THe express elevator that did go all the way had a human being inside of it. He suffered broken ankles, and is alive and well. He was not burned. The elevator that came up from the basement, on the other hand, was blown off its hinges.
Click to expand...

You can't even get the most basic of facts right, so it is no surprise that you cannot come to proper conclusions either.

Numerous witnesses described fireballs down numerous elevator shafts. Numerous people were killed by those fireballs, and you dismiss those victims out of hand. That is disgusting.

There was more than one express elevator that went from the top to the bottom. In fact, there were three in each tower. The one that you are talking about was 50A and it fell to below the basement with Arturo Griffith inside. Note that it is the very same elevator that Mr. Filipe was standing in front of when he got burnt by flames blowing the doors open and burning the poor man.

How dare you dismiss so cavalierly all of the victims who died horrific deaths by fire inside numerous elevators, and how dare you so cavalierly dismiss all of the survivors who describe the horror of that day, just to satisfy whatever twisted agenda you seek to promote.
 
If you were to slice him open and dump out the contents, he could keep 10 acres of land fertile for weeks.

(He's full of ----)
 
LashL said:
You can't even get the most basic of facts right, so it is no surprise that you cannot come to proper conclusions either.

Numerous witnesses described fireballs down numerous elevator shafts. Numerous people were killed by those fireballs, and you dismiss those victims out of hand. That is disgusting.

There was more than one express elevator that went from the top to the bottom. In fact, there were three in each tower. The one that you are talking about was 50A and it fell to below the basement with Arturo Griffith inside. Note that it is the very same elevator that Mr. Filipe was standing in front of when he got burnt by flames blowing the doors open and burning the poor man.

How dare you dismiss so cavalierly all of the victims who died horrific deaths by fire inside numerous elevators, and how dare you so cavalierly dismiss all of the survivors who describe the horror of that day, just to satisfy whatever twisted agenda you seek to promote.
Click to expand...


hear hear!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom